Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Russia Conundrum
U.S.News & World Report ^ | 3/13/06 | Mortimer B. Zuckerman

Posted on 03/04/2006 6:21:31 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe

People are puzzled by Russia. It truly is like one of its famous matryoshka dolls--inside the big doll there are more little dolls, each smaller than the last. The big doll is that it is an authoritarian state run by the secret police, the siloviki, or higher police. They are the go-to people when you want anything done. That was so back in 1986 when I was in Moscow to assist in the release of our Moscow bureau chief, Nick Daniloff, and nothing has changed except the name--the KGB is now the FSB. These grim enforcers have been at the core of the Russian state for decades, an elite group with an unshakable belief in their mission to promote national greatness above all else. Their influence waned during the era of President Boris Yeltsin; today, it waxes under President Vladimir Putin.

The siloviki hold a third of all the top government jobs and more than half the leadership positions in ministries, agencies, and state-run companies. Seven from Putin's inner circle, including his chief of staff and his deputy, control nine state-dominated companies with assets equal to 40 percent of the country's GDP. These men, the new Russian oligarchs, don't just have political connections in the Kremlin; they're in the Kremlin. Putin himself, of course, is a former head of the FSB.

The principal focus of Putin and his men is energy. Russia provides nearly half of Europe's natural gas and a third of its oil. When the new Gazprom pipeline under the Baltic Sea is ready, Europe will depend on Russia for up to 80 percent of its gas, giving it enormous leverage over the Continent. How concerned should we be?

Pluses--and minuses. When the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, we assumed Russia would rejoin the international community, democratize its political system, and guarantee civil rights. It didn't happen. Putin has consolidated the state's grip over national television, turned the upper house of parliament into an appointed body, vitiated the power of locally elected regional governors, effectively seized control of the courts, and developed a form of state capitalism that tolerates private companies only if they are subservient to the state's agenda. Putin's strategy is less to enhance democracy than to build a strong Russia.

This slow transformation into a one-party state may raise concern in the West, but it is largely supported by the people. Popular legitimacy comes from genuine elections, with real choices and more-or-less honest vote counting--even though Russia lacks the democratic components of an independent court system and free media.

The Russians don't miss Yeltsin's pseudo democracy, marked by turmoil, decay, and loss of prestige. They welcome Putin's commitment to order, his efforts to enhance national pride, and his reining in the oligarchs to bring about a fairer distribution of income.

But there has been a cost. Greater state control and diminished respect for the rule of law have inadvertently created the very conditions that encourage corruption, a situation neatly summarized by Putin's former economic adviser, Andrei Illarionov, as one in which bureaucrats "tend to make decisions that have a higher rate of return for themselves, not for the country."

The corruption in Russia today is staggering. It took bribes to airline agents of only 2,000 and 3,000 rubles, or about $75 and $100, to allow a Chechen woman and an accomplice to board separate flights and blow them up. Ninety died. A raid on a school in Beslan was facilitated by a police officer who helped the terrorists get through checkpoints: Three hundred thirty-eight children and adults died.

Still, Russia's achievements are real. Private property is widely accepted, the Communist Party has no chance of returning to power, the bureaucracy has been cut, and military spending is down from about 30 percent of GNP to about 3 percent. If Putin looks at times like a czar incarnate, he also looks like a bold market reformer.

It is in foreign policy that the changes in Russia are most worrisome. Witness Putin's attempt to steal Ukraine's presidential election, his interference in Abkhazia and Moldova, his support for the dictatorship in Belarus, his sale to the extremist Iranian regime not only of a nuclear power plant but also of antiaircraft weapons that could be deployed against the West, his willingness to open a dialogue with Hamas terrorists when he stonewalled Chechen Islamic terrorists, and the anti-American rhetoric accompanying his missile testing.

Yet Putin is an intelligent and clear-minded leader with whom it is in our interest to have a dialogue. Russia is integral to defeating terrorism, achieving a non-nuclear Korean peninsula, stemming the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, enhancing our energy supply, and leaning on Iran.

President Bush once said he looked into Putin's eyes and saw "the man's soul," calling him a man he "could do business with." Many now look into Putin's soul and see a former KGB colonel who is a natural authoritarian. Let America beware of the latter but respond to the former.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Russia
KEYWORDS: putin; russia; siloviki

1 posted on 03/04/2006 6:21:33 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe

What soul could one see when looking in the eyes of a dead fish?


2 posted on 03/04/2006 6:57:00 PM PST by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GSlob

This article is really pretty balanced. Putin has institutionalized private property rights and cracked down on the Yeltsin Oligarchs, but the KGB crowd seems to be in charge. Yet elections do count. The people can always change who they want to run the government.


3 posted on 03/04/2006 7:10:10 PM PST by GeorgefromGeorgia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GeorgefromGeorgia
It does not matter who runs, or will run, the government. Whoever gets there will be pretty adequate to the "people" or, more scientifically, to the civilizational way of life. And these civilizational systems, per Samuel Huntington, are stable on 500 years+ scale.
I will illustrate what I mean here with a true story which happened in the United States: at my former workplace they were conducting an executive search for a "sweep" [SVP = senior vice president]. Large sweep's office stood empty for about half a year. Nobody knew who or when would get there. Once I put on a [pretty exaggerated] facial expression of a prophet from bad movies, and with outstretched hand and wild look predicted what they should put on the nameplate on sweep's door: "I see it... I see it... GREEDY A**HOLE!".
Well, couple months later they did get their sweep. And, boy, was I proved right! Within a year they squeezed him out. [As a homework for you: and what is his replacement?]
The same here: there is no need to know who they are, or will be. What's needed to know is what they are. And this is perfectly knowable and predictable from the first principles.
4 posted on 03/04/2006 7:28:11 PM PST by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe
"Russia is integral to defeating terrorism, achieving a non-nuclear Korean peninsula, stemming the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, enhancing our energy supply, and leaning on Iran."

Except, it is against every single one of those things happening, and has no intention whatever of helping us in any way. As long as its ability to make trouble gets it this sort of blind and stupid attention and deference, its mission in life will be to make as much trouble as possible.

5 posted on 03/04/2006 8:08:41 PM PST by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeorgefromGeorgia
If the people elect Adolph Hitler and he launches an aggressive war to take over the world that kills 50 million people, does anybody care about the elected part? Russia is doing its utmost to give the craziest and evilest men on the planet nuclear weapons, in the hope they will use them on us, and in the meantime keep oil prices jacked up. If they could boost the price of oil a dollar by nuking Baltimore, they would. Evil is evil.
6 posted on 03/04/2006 8:11:23 PM PST by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GeorgefromGeorgia; x5452; Hill of Tara
Still, Russia's achievements are real. Private property is widely accepted, the Communist Party has no chance of returning to power, the bureaucracy has been cut, and military spending is down from about 30 percent of GNP to about 3 percent. If Putin looks at times like a czar incarnate, he also looks like a bold market reformer.

These items are true. The balance of the article is based on whose spin you are hearing.
7 posted on 03/05/2006 5:10:15 AM PST by GarySpFc (de oppresso liber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JasonC; x5452; Hill of Tara
You make a good point when you bring up the Hitler scenario. After all, Hitler was appointed Chancellor by Hindenburg after the Nazis garnered the most seats in the Reichstag.
You are correct to point out Russia's dirty hands in assisting Iran in its development of its nuclear facilities.
However, I disagree the Putin falls into the evil category. I believe Russia is trying to have its cake and eat it too by profiting from the nuke sales on one hand and trying to placate the EU and USA on the other hand.
Such duplicity is not working, and Putin needs to fall on one side of the fence or the other.
It is not encouraging that Russia fell on the wrong side of the fence regarding Saddam.
8 posted on 03/05/2006 5:49:29 AM PST by GeorgefromGeorgia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GeorgefromGeorgia
Helping Iranian nutjobs get nuclear weapons is abetting mass murder on a civilizational scale, and is evil. No moral human being would get within a hundred miles of the slightest risk of such a thing, for love or money.
9 posted on 03/05/2006 7:51:13 AM PST by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GarySpFc

have you read #6? He thinks Russia would nuke Baltimore and equates Putin to Hitler.


10 posted on 03/05/2006 2:11:51 PM PST by Hill of Tara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GeorgefromGeorgia

Well, Putin, as Russia's president, was hired by his people to look out for Russia's interests, and not the interests of the United States.

I dont think Putin is evil, either. He wants Russia to maintain a role as an active and influential nation in the global community. With an atrophying military and not that much money to put into foreign aid, he only has 3 tools to work with:

1. Military sales.

2. Diplomatic influence/ Security Council veto.

3. oil sales.

I doubt Putin wants Iran to have nuclear weapons, after all, then they could nuke Russia over Chechnya.


11 posted on 03/05/2006 2:19:44 PM PST by Hill of Tara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson